Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (10734)	10/22/1998 3:17:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Bill, Read the edit of my previous post to you, tell me what you think. bp

To: Bill who wrote (10734)	10/22/1998 3:22:00 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

What are you worried about. They would never abandon such an opportunity. Get ready for a ton of substance and fact, non of which will be in context, supported by logic, or the ludicrous premise of having done any thought for themselves.

To: Bill who wrote (10734)	10/22/1998 10:50:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

>>> Yes, I would. But his death gave a forum to those who wish to "toughen laws against hate crimes". As if murder by hate could be stopped by tougher laws than we have against murder by non-hate. Awaiting the "wisdom" of Schuh or Hughes on this one. >>> Well, I voted for the death penalty and for three strikes. I also feel that all murders should be fully investigated, and that in the past not all were. Nor the present for that matter. Typical american Moderate's thought process, BTW, if you are looking for a label to pin on me. You guys have never had a dialogue with a real liberal, is my guess. If you had, you'd be going nuts by now. Chaz P.S. I once lived in a county in the northwest where a major portion of the sheriffs department used to take it's vacations and sabatticals in Rhodesia and South Africa, (before the revolutions succeeded.) They rented out as mercenaries fighting the native populations, and actually had the nerve to write about one such action in Soldier of Fortune magazine. They basically liked killing black people. They were notorious animals locally, too, known for pulling all kinds of people, including white middle class housewives, out of their cars and beating them at the side of the road. Later, they were arrested (by ATF?) for stealing weapons from the sheriffs department and/or local armory and selling them to their clients. Not the kind of people who energetically investigate hate crimes when there are no special laws to stimulate the investigation. Ditto for the South of the recent past, where the cops often wore hoods at night. I think that is why there are special hate crime laws. And why the FBI gets called in for those investigations, as I understand it.

To: Bill who wrote (10734)	10/23/1998 1:04:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

You know, I don't read most of what goes down here, so it's not generally a good idea to mention my name, unless you really want a response. On this particular issue, of course, all I wrote was: I don't think people often get killed solely because they're heterosexual. It does happen to homosexuals, though. Do you think that's "moral"? A bit barbed, but gay bashing has a long and colorful history, and the recent incident everyone's brought up is far from the only instance one could point to. I didn't say anything about blame or justice. jlallen factually and substantially responded with jewishworldreview.com which denied any possible connection between preaching hatred of homosexuality ( but not homosexuals, of course) and hate crimes. Considering the source, and the fact that homosexuals got sent to concentration camps too, I found that response somewhat ironic. Somehow, I doubt that www.jewishworld.com would post a similar article about preaching hatred of Judaism (but not Jews, of course). Sorry.